Hey, if you're one of the lucky people who don't have problems with SF (that you notice, anyway), good for you. However, I was talking about the attitude that the original poster seemed to be expressing. Yours isn't really relevant to that interpretation.

Which makes noting that it has SF worth it, because that additional fact is enough to condemn the game.

Only for a screeching minority. The rest of us keep right on playing our games...

--------------------------------------------------------------
GW: Nilaar Madalla, lvl 20 R/Mo / Tolyl Nor, lvl 20 E/Mo / Xylos Gath, lvl 13 W/Mo

http://www.goldfrapp.co.uk/

I just think the paranoia over SF is overblown.

I used to agree with you, until I actually installed it. X3 was the game that made me overcome my distrust of it, and I'm quite sorry it did (despite being a fun game that I won't be playing anymore). As expected, SF put my dvdrw back into PIO mode, which caused numerous burning problems, bad dvds (and hence wasted money), and completely ruined dvd playback. So for me, at least, the 'paranoia' was justified. Everyone else's mileage may vary.

I read his comment as he wouldn't buy it based on quality, and even worse (doubly!) it had SF.

Er, and how is that different than what I said. It's bad enough because it's a crappy game, but even worse, it uses SF. Which means that even if it were not a crappy game, it would still be bad because it uses SF. Seems to mesh with my translation.

Do you buy a shitty game just because it DOESN'T have SF?! No, you don't buy it because it's a shitty game!

That's one way to look at it I suppose. But do you buy a good game because it has SF? Or do you not buy a good game because it has SF? Generally I'd think the latter would happen a lot more than the former. Which makes noting that it has SF worth it, because that additional fact is enough to condemn the game.

I absolutey hate Starforce but I find it hilarious how many people on here tell everyone to buy Space Rangers 2 despite it's use of Starforce.

SR2 is the only SF game I've been remotely interested in. However, it's supposed to be released in North America, so I'm waiting to see for that and also to see if it will still have SF. A quick search and it looks like SR2 has been cracked as well.

I absolutey hate Starforce but I find it hilarious how many people on here tell everyone to buy Space Rangers 2 despite it's use of Starforce. Seems the boycott only goes as far as some games. I won't be purchasing either.

If I misinterpreted the comments, then I apologize for that. I just think the paranoia over SF is overblown.

Anyhow, I tried the demo. It's not bad (and it's the same as the Russian one), but not revolutionary by any means. Still, there are some okay things about it:

- graphics are decent, with some good special effects
- grenade blasts can knock you to the ground; the same thing happens with enemy soldiers, as sometimes you'll see them staggering around holding their ears after a grenade goes off near them
- temporal shield was kind of interesting; it can catch bullets, and then you can run into guys and kill them with the bullets stuck in the shield
- physics are implemented pretty well

Oddities:

- everyone spoke perfect, unaccented English, even the German soldiers
- the game ran fine, but quick-saving caused it to run choppily
- fires from exploding barrels take a very long time to go out

It's an okay demo, but in terms of gameplay, it's rather old-school; newer games have left this behind.

Uh, no, did you read his post? "Doubly so because it uses Starforce" roughly translates into "It's a crappy game so I wouldn't buy it anyway, but even if it was good, I wouldn't because it uses Starforce". Which is a sane way to look at it, and, of course, makes complete sense.

Your rough translation is indeed very rough. I'm not sure how you got "but even if it was good" out of that...

Main Entry: dou·bly
1 : in a twofold manner
2 : to twice the degree

I read his comment as he wouldn't buy it based on quality, and even worse (doubly!) it had SF.

edit: ESTF's point was he wasn't going to buy it to begin with. So saying, on top of that, that he wasn't going to buy it since it had SF, was silly. Do you buy a shitty game just because it DOESN'T have SF?! No, you don't buy it because it's a shitty game!


--------------------------------------------------------------
GW: Nilaar Madalla, lvl 20 R/Mo / Tolyl Nor, lvl 20 E/Mo / Xylos Gath, lvl 13 W/Mo

http://www.goldfrapp.co.uk/
This comment was edited on Mar 1, 22:48.

The point was you wouldn't have bought the game (based on the demo) even if it didn't have StarForce, making your "I won't buy this because it has StarForce" complaints moot.

Uh, no, did you read his post? "Doubly so because it uses Starforce" roughly translates into "It's a crappy game so I wouldn't buy it anyway, but even if it was good, I wouldn't because it uses Starforce". Which is a sane way to look at it, and, of course, makes complete sense.

What would be another popular SF protected title? It's difficult to prove if games like Ubersoldier aren't pirated because of SF or because they suck. Right now, I'd guess it's because they suck.

Trackmania (all the TM games), and Silent Hunter 3 are examples of genuinely brilliant games that utilise Starforce.

"Starforce???"...NO Demo for YOU Burut !!!

*
"When the Boogieman goes to sleep at night , he checks under the bed and in the closets for ME" !!!.

"Next up, how about actually making a point?"

The point was you wouldn't have bought the game (based on the demo) even if it didn't have StarForce, making your "I won't buy this because it has StarForce" complaints moot.

Wave Motion Gun - yup you got it.

Woohoo! And thank you, sir, for bringing back some fond childhood memories.

Back on topic: sounds like the demo blows (good observations, guys. Thanks.) I think I'll skip this one.

Thanks for the heads up. SF = stay away for me.

Here are my comments on the game:

This game would be not bad in 1993. It has no gameplay, and looks average. The AI (squad and enemy) are dumb as bricks - don't confront them, just position yourself so as to see just the elbow of the enemy and keep shooting it until the guy goes down. He will never move nor react. I did this through the entire first section.

Graphics are average, but even so, the game frames out constantly as you are looking around the "outside", depending on how much there is to render in any given direction. The outside being a small street with dead ends everywhere but where you are supposed to be going.

You can see a lot of Far Cry visual influence in this game (indoor Far Cry only) in the doors and props, which would be good if they knew how to pull it off.

I could take long loading times in games that it made sense in (like FC), but this game I cannot honestly say WHY in the hell does it take 5 minutes to load that crappy level.

Starforce is the least of this game's problems.
Russian studios: Please, stop making games like these. You are not selling them very well, you are not gaining good rep from them (it's actually quite the contrary).

Doesn't StarForce always ask you to reboot the first time you run a game that uses it? I downloaded and installed this demo on my laptop and I never got taht prompt.

I think it will only ask for a restart if the drivers either don't exist on your system at all prior to the install, or have been updated from the ones that do..

IOW (TTBoMK), if you've installed SF on your computer, and have already rebooted when asked, and the drivers you have installed are the most recent SF drivers, you won't need to reboot when you install another SF game.


EDIT: Yeah -- like Semantics said
-----
GW: Tashen Boke [R/Me]; Rosti The Ninja [Mo/R]; Gort Grimley [W/Ne]
This comment was edited on Mar 1, 15:34.

Maybe you already had it installed, then.

Doesn't StarForce always ask you to reboot the first time you run a game that uses it? I downloaded and installed this demo on my laptop and I never got taht prompt.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
www.pxa.ca

Wave Motion Gun - yup you got it.